ObamaCare Rocks the Dolt Vote!

How shallow is your average leftist? From time immemorial the question has tormented conservatives. Conformist pap like “if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” and “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for” are mottos so empty and devoid of substance that they could only have originated from the port side of the spectrum. Our opponents’ unsavory lightness of thinking makes them little more than attention magnets who compete with one another to see who can come up with the mostsuperficial way of analyzing policy issues. Depth is irrelevant to the faithful. Their minds are fixed upon a utopia that can never arrive. The notion of half a loaf is unacceptable. Why should it be when one anticipates heaven on earth?

Given their sanctimoniousness, it’s not surprising that the health care bill failed to titillate some devout leftists. One would presuppose that the eminent peril to our liberty contained in its language would have produced euphoria in control freaks everywhere.

One coat-and-tie radical over at MSLSD defended his right to be unhappy about the compromised legislation, proclaiming, “You do not want to live in a country where there is no one analyzing anything from a purist position.”

Actually, I do and I’m probably not the only one. Many of us (known as “adults”) comprehend that nothing involving humans can ever be “pure” and a U.S. devoid of impractical idealists would be a serious upgrade over the status quo.

Just how catastrophic the health care bill will be is unknowable at present. However, in light of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s legalistic attempt to make it irrevocable and outside the purview of future Congresses, the smart money is on complete disaster.

Thanks to Scott Brown’s magnificent victory in Massachusetts, the Democrats will certainly have to modify their game plan, but there is no question that they will never give up.

Rest assured the Democrats will get something done. Believing otherwise is fantastic and amounts to trusting Nancy Pelosi, which is a mistake under any circumstances. Indeed, the speaker of the House stated that Brown’s arrival in the Senate would only influence “how we would proceed but it doesn’t mean we won’t have a health care bill.”

With Democrats, it’s all about power and when the rules fail to favor your side you press to change them. They still may try reconciliation and manipulating the process to allow for its passage with only 51 votes.

Yet whatever is passed and foisted upon the American people, the sizable contingent of drones and indoctrinated youths whose coordinated ignorance propelled Barack Obama into our highest office will be pleased by the news. How could they not be? It’s a win for their guy.

On the surface — the place where members of the species Democratus emoticus usually swim — the health care debate comes down to sentiment. Feeling is their argument.

Desires for “reform” (read: government degradation of existing services) buoy them and affirm that they’re good while we’re bad. Again, it illustrates their holiest truth: they care and we don’t.

The great conservative genius Thomas Sowell elucidates this axiom in the pages of his latest masterpiece, Intellectuals and Society:

But to be for “social justice” and “saving the environment” or to be “anti-war” is more than just a set of beliefs about empirical facts. This vision puts you on a higher moral plane as someone concerned and compassionate, someone who is for peace in the world, a defender of the downtrodden, and someone who wants to preserve the beauty of nature and save the planet from being polluted by others less caring. In short one vision makes you special and the other does not.

Such a worldview oozes mechanically from leftists. One is more likely to hear original insight from an Asian carp than from a “hope and change” groupie. Thus, December spawned yet anothermonster.

With a sanctimoniousness that is eternal, some C-list members of the glitterati donated their time to producing a bobble-headed public service announcement (PSA) entitled “Rock the Vote on Health Care.”

This clip proved every bit as vapid as the last. What else can we expect from those who deem “Yes we can!” a profundity? The effort is politics for the discombobulated created by the non-entities of the self-esteem generation.

Given that the heinous health care bill managed to pass the Senate in December shortly after the video’s release, these Hollynards undoubtedly feel vindicated for our now being threatened by the Damocles Sword that is ObamaCare.

The theme behind the PSA is that “the personal is political” (yawn). Obama flunkies are advised to ostracize those who disagree with them about America’s need to nationalize its health care.

How should they sway their peers? Via debate? Never! Logical argumentation is for non-Prada-wearing members of the population only.

The plebes must emulate their TMZ heroes and refuse to have sex with their loved ones, acquaintances, and/or assorted strangers until the rest of us learn to stop worrying and love the Leviathan’s confiscation of one-sixth of our economy.

That the dim leftists vow “to never f*** you if you’re against us” may despair those readers of PajamasMedia.com who had “contract syphilis and gonorrhea” down as New Year’s resolutions, but, as with most leftist premises, this one is fallacious.

Politics is only personal if you’re a self-absorbed freak. The rest of us intuit that what assists us does not necessarily benefit the nation.

Senator Ben Nelson and his “Cornhusker kickback” are an excellent case in point. That Nebraska at the moment, unlike every other state, is scheduled to have its health care costs paid by the federocracy did not impress its citizens.

Contrary to what the PSA would predict, Nebraskans were outraged and reactednegatively to the bizarre concession, as it embodies everything that is wrong with Washington, D.C.

Further, no analysis is made in terms of whether or not nationalized health care would be worth its cost. No reasons are given for its efficacy, as facts entirely — particularly the impending bankruptcy of Medicare and Social Security — are ignored by these actors.

The only thing that even resembles an argument here is that we should back this legislation because “two-thirds of young Americans without health insurance don’t get treatment because of cost.”

Well, why don’t they? No justification is provided. Poor people in this demographic are already covered by Medicaid, while many of the better-off under age 18 are the beneficiaries of SCHIP.

I too was once a member of that demographic. Years ago I had what was termed “emergency insurance.” This meant that I had a very large deductible and it only went into effect if I got hit by a truck or faced another catastrophic situation.

Yes, it was far from ideal but I was satisfied with the arrangement. Of course, had a “free” (sic) government policy been offered, I would have accepted it.

However, despite being a callow and feckless youth, I still would have felt unease over a choice between paying for LeviathanCare and going to jail. No doubt many twentyish citizens would feel the same way if they took the time to read the bill’s particulars.

Confusing “free” with ossified bureaucratic offerings is forgivable, as lacking experiential knowledge is the essence of youth, but trendy leftists cannot be forgiven for their outright lies about the bill’s specifics.

These overexposed would-be stars deliberately serve deception to the ignorant. The only thing they want to “teach” is that the government will always provide.

Many conservatives express wonderment over the need to refute bits of political indoctrination like this goofy fluff. They deem PSAs like these below their attention spans but are incorrect in their assumptions.

We must not forget that the American people elected President Barack Obama in 2008 based on gibberitic slogans like “Hope and change” and “Change we can believe in.”

The emergence of Scott Brown in Massachusetts electrified conservatives, but Obama’s emotional, stylistic irrelevancies swayed a majority of the electorate. His inauguration is precisely why our republic faces dire circumstances.

We must fight the left where they are and from where they seek to indoctrinate. These celebutards replicate within La Brea passion pits that most of us shudder to enter, but it is within these nether regions that we must engage, ridicule, and defeat them.

65 Comments, 65 Threads

1.
Rosinante

“When you see a 40 something with a 20 something, you know there is something wrong with both of them.”
“A man can be happy with any woman as long as he does not love her.
Oscar Wilde
Irish dramatist, novelist, & poet (1854 – 1900)

“It is the nature of desire not to be satisfied, and most men live only for the gratification of it.”
Aristotle, Politics
Greek critic, philosopher, physicist, & zoologist (384 BC – 322 BC)

wow…. a conservative knocking the left for superficiality. Can I get an fMRI of you (that’s ‘functional’) ? I’d really like to see where the irony part has gone missing.
Ok, using those frontal lobes a bit….
1) inclusion of a lot of people into a category will include the fringe elements.
or 2) not having frontal lobes causes a dis-inhibition of behaviorhttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122810679http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/anime.php?id=3750 (ha ha)
which both makes someone superficial AND the life of the party.
or 3) Group dynamics leads to those who are more superficial dominating the discussion as a group forms and tends to have a progressively more extreme view dominating
facultystaff.richmond.edu/~dforsyth/gd
(also see: ‘tea party’, “Palin, Sarah”, pretty much any new political group).
4) similarly, those without standing or power will seek it by taking controversial positions–these tend to be not very informed and rather controversial. Unlike all the other categories I do not have a published, generally accepted reference for this one. Oh, I know ! Look at the following posts for supportive examples !

Yes, conservatives must do the same. No sex with anyone who is without reason and supports top-down government without resort to an independent judiciary and rule-by-law.

It will take a while, but genetics will have its way. The country will divide into “conservative breeders” and “leftist non-breeders.” Of course, the non-breeders will disappear, as they are doing in Europe and Japan.

Wow – great video, it really galvanized me.
It reminded me another Hollywood mighty persuasive progressive action – Hillary Swank summoning the press to inform them that she will not marry her beau(?) until the gay marriage will become an enshrined right in America -
Sure, some applauded this – yet most of people thought that she belongs to a mental ward -

I cherish the thought of all these white college and college-aged kids who voted for and supported the messiah, when they finally solicit for jobs and no jobs are there or their jobs are going to a protected minority (as in the case of the new Miss America), they will suddenly realize they have been bamboozeled. Listening to rap noise, partying, acting black and sounding hip supporting the Won, will be of no use in the real world.

And they still will not have health care.

“These overexposed would-be stars deliberately serve deception to the ignorant. The only thing they want to “teach” is that the government will always provide.”

Unfortunately we will never be able to compete with the left because as we know the left own education from preK to college. And the left will always dumb down their students to make them malleable to manipulation. It is only when they graduate and meet the real world that they wake up.

“They would be wise to remember that more Americans get their “news” from satirical sources than from legitimate journalistic endeavors. We must take this tripe seriously and respond or pap is all that is ever heard.”

SNL, MSNBC and Jon Stewart are the main souces of “news” for college kids. Fox tried to have a late-night news show but it too went left. Again the left owns news. And just what is “legitimate journalistic endeavors?” With the exception of Fox, there is no other legitimate news.

- The plebes must emulate their TMZ heroes and refuse to have sex with their loved ones, acquaintances, and/or assorted strangers until the rest of us learn to stop worrying and love the Leviathan’s confiscation of one-sixth of our economy.

Two things. Well… three, actually.

First, there’s a Darwinian elegance to this sex-for-socialism plan which apparently escapes the brain trust that dreamed it up: as the percentage of hapless leftists who refuse to reproduce increases, the number of little Red Diaper babies, abortions and single-parent households on the horizon decreases. To whatever infinitesimal extent that effect is produced, it is only to the good of the Republic.

Second, if this idiotic scheme is actually pursued on any level above that of ‘statistically insignificant’, it will further erode, rather than strengthen, the already fractured unity on the left. Ditto on this facet’s benefit to the Republic.

Based on those inescapable prognoses, I say encourage this approach or, better yet, just ignore it after a good chuckle.

Moral adolescence – like any other form of adolescence – can’t be “defeated”. Maturation through real-life experience and classical education is the only remedy. The hard core left – at least as personified by anyone brain-dead enough to extort sex in the blind service of socialism – is already a death cult, and is not interested in real-life experience or education. Just read any of the troll comments at this site. Thus, reasonable people would do well to just get out of their way if they want to self-destruct using this kind of narcissistic nihilism. The American people most definitely did not elect BHO in 2008 based on gibberitic slogans; they elected him because (a) the alternative was not a serious candidate and (b) they were instructed to do so by the propaganda generated from The Left Wing Media for 8 years straight. Attacking the gibberish is not the answer.

Meanwhile – third – I completely missed the part of this article that was devoted to fixing the GOP and putting back in place a government here in the U.S.A. that recognizes and honors the limits placed upon it by the Constitution. I missed the part that discussed educating so-called “moderates” regarding those concepts, rather than simply telling them what they want to hear and/or compromising with their socialist-lite proclivities in order to grow a “bigger tent”.

One more whiny diatribe at this site complaining about leftist misbehavior – as though anyone should expect anything else from moral adolescents who are drawn to an empty, thoroughly discredited ideology – is just preaching to the choir at this point. That may be gratifying on some level, but it’s not an effective strategy to restore the Republican Form of Government guaranteed by our Constitution.

“That the dim leftists vow “to never f*** you if you’re against us” may despair those readers of PajamasMedia.com who had “contract syphilis and gonorrhea” down as New Year’s resolutions, but, as with most leftist premises, this one is fallacious.”

Less sex among and with this group is a positive step in reducing healthcare costs. Of course, when the incidence of HIV, AIDS and other STDs significantly decreases because of this, the left will call it a triumph for comdom use.

well if i need to get laid i too will be for obamacare. if they are that stupid or drunk to begin with, we aren’t going to get to the point of discussing it. i will directly manipulate the discussion to how pretty they are. lol

I can hear it now. Instead of “hey baby, what’s your sign?” it will be “So, what’s your stand on healthcare?”. Yeah right.

Funny the things people are afraid of and aren’t afraid of. The CDC report for 2008 on STD’s shows a marked increase in cases of Syphilis and Chlamydia so obviously this targeted age group isn’t having that “sexual history” conversation. Does anyone really think they are going to quiery a potential partner about their politics first???

Organizing for America is now after the school age kids. Perry High School in Masillon OH. The kids are encouraged to read Saul Alinsky and Obama books and to sign up to volunteer 12 hrs. per week to move the Obama agenda forward in 2010. Read it all at atlasshrugs.com. A parent who has an 11th grader in school sent the papers to Geller. I live in OH, this is just outrageous. I’m going to post this at every blog I can just to spread the word. How dare they politicize our schools. Legalities are in question and need to be addressed.

I would laugh at the written truth and mock their naivety, until I remember that 52% of the American public who bother to vote was enamored with cliches of “yes, we can!” and “hope.” And even after a few favorable election outcomes, I’m not convinced that much has changed in the last fifteen months.

If Republicans make huge gains in November 2010 as I expect, I predict the shallow and apathetic will revert back to form, continue to applaud narcissistic charlatans who stand in front of greek columns, posing as heaven sent, and we’ll be seeing President Obama come 2016.

Anyone “up” for a re-imagining of the farce comedy the “Lysistrata” by Aristophanes?

Good. I hope we never get socialized medicine. Then maybe some of these irresponsible out of control fornicating children will keep their flies zipped and their panties on.

The ridiculousness of the entire concept is even more silly than Aristophanes ever imagined in his his social strata and time where recreational homosexual pederasty was the rule and women withholding their “favors” to force men to do anything was ridiculously funny.

The dimwitted crassness of this ploy only speaks of the childishness and dependency of the audience.

Someone call Professor Hanson. He is due some credit for pointing out modern society’s striking similarities to those of the past.

What are those people going to feel like when they become parents and realize they attempted to turn political discourse into a form of Prostitution.
This is one of the most abyssal forms of dehumanization and desensitization I have ever seen, and this is just about a Bill.
Well at least we know what they think of young people as a political base. This makes my “legalize Pot” as a carrot trick look benign
Again, to be clear, more important than the general repugnant nature of prostituting ones self for the political party, is the precedent of the body as lure or bait, this really personifies the Personal as Political.
Whores for the State.
I feel a novel going on.

Today’s progressives/Leftoids are into micro-managing, perhaps best personified in the person of someone like Chuck Schumer (small, clammy hands)or Barney Frank.

That’s what’s wrong with their whole shtick, their brains (term used loosely) just sit around dreamin’ up foul little niggling rules for everyone else to follow.

It’s awful, considering the hugeness and the grandiosity of what the unfettered, well-intentioned human being can achieve. Whatever progressives institute in the realm of bureaucratic restraints on “healthcare”, it will be someone like “cough into your sleeve” Kathleen Sebelius, HHS, who will be issuing long edicts as to the specific level of “care” you’re entitled to receive, as a function of your age & etc.

Ludicrous.

Are leftoids jealous of freedom ? Do they want to bring everyone down to their level ? (that certainly seems the impetus in education, political correctness, etc.)

“It has been well said that really up-to-date liberals do not care what people do, as long as it is compulsory.” ~George Will

Even “liberal” Camille Paglia is down on them…

“Liberalism, like second-wave feminism, seems to have become a new
religion for those who profess contempt for religion. It has been
reduced to an elitist set of rhetorical formulas, which posit the
working class as passive, mindless victims in desperate need of
salvation by the state. Individual rights and free expression, which used to be liberal values, are being gradually subsumed to worship of government power.”

Being a Britih Liberal (a very different animal to American Liberals) and speaking from experience I can say that consevative leaning ladies are better in bed – and do not subject you to the angst ridden self analysis before and after.

The good thing about this is that it will help stop the spread of STD’s. The people who would be swayed by this advert are the types who have screwed everything and anything since they hit double digits and are a veritble walking STD roach motel.

@20, arhooley: “Isn’t this the ‘abstinence doesn’t work crowd?” Har! So right.

To anyone who’d say, “I won’t have sex with you if you don’t support ObamaCare,” I’d say, “Thanks for being so considerate for a change. You wouldn’t get anywhere with me even if you wanted to, so you may as well stop trying!”

Re. #12: Goy for President! It seems that restoring limited government based on the letter and intent of the Constitution is always the answer and the right antidote to the inanities and excesses of both political parties.

BTW, this article made me chuckle as I always believed that the real driving force of the anti-war, anti-establishment movement of the 60′s and early 70′s was that otherwise un-interesting geeks of that era could now vie for the good looking women along with the Jocks and BMOCs.

The premise only works if you have an irrational radical Leftist for a lover; however, most rational people will just laugh at the banality & superficiality of the spectacle of the commercial. The commercial itself reminds me of those self-absorbed PETA people ads with a ridiculous premise used for the viewer. The syllogism really is not effective as a tool because it is not logical:

If Congress does not pass ObamaCare, then ________ will not have sex with you. Just putting it in this perspective takes the power away from the pompous, superfluous people & puts it squarely on them. They look like idiot unthinking drones.

My sentiments exactly, however I apparently put it in a way that didn’t pass muster.

I simply said that apparently Obama nixed protesters because they weren’t patriotic when they disagree with the anointed one.
Obama nixed listening to Rush or watching Fox because the latter’s not a news station and the former isn’t an Obama fan. And dissed
the supreme court because they stated the law about foreign contributions to political candidates correctly and showed the great one up.
Then Obama supports the withholding of favors unless they’re for ObamaCare.

But, since Obama, himself, screwed up the insurance bill by handing it over to incompetents Pelosi and Reid to write, Obama’s
responsible for the mess the bill is in. And thus deserves not the attentions of his well kept wife.

Thus, like a submarine captain fires a torpedo and fails to set the time fuse correctly whereby it ends up destroying the very sub
that launched it (see the hunt for red october), with ObamaCare being on life support as a result of Obama’s mismanagement, Michelle
dutifully must withhold wifely favors from Obama.

Or, go the Bill Clinton path that says certain acts are not to be considered “sex”. Thus Michelle has license to learn how to
visit the oval office and give an oral report to the President on bended knees.

We are have yet to pass any health care reform so I will assume you are talking about our current health care system, a private system. Twenty two dollars for a glass of water and a two aspriin…. because they have to pay the the nurse and the doctor that currently earn 950.oo dollars, or more.. an hour….

Wow! The permutations of this are endless. What happens if you are (for example) some strapping guy who is ready to seal the deal with an agreeable and comely hottie. She has indicated her assent with all of the affidavits and other documentary evidence required for approved carnality by the Federal Rules of Evidence and the tenets of academic feminism. At that point she suddenly pops the question about Obamacare. You say “Of Course, I’m All For It – Death to the Republicans” and proceed to he aforementioned carnal activity. The next day you fess up and say “You know. I’ve thought about it and I really can’t get behind Obamacare since it will increase health costs across the board and require a bloated bureaucracy to operate not to mention the inevitability of tightly rationed care, particularly for the aged.” You add “By the way I think Sarah Palin is sorta hot.” {If you’re in this deep you may as well go all the way.]

At that point can the (former) object of your affection sue you? Could she argue that you obtained sexual pleasure under false pretenses? What would the damages be? Is this a free speech question or one involving breach-of-contract? Does your suddenly retrograde position of health care (not to mention Ms. Palen) negate the formerly given assent and retroactively transform the situation from a night of bliss to one of rape?

And what about the other side? What if you are an Obamasoxer-type chap who has just gotten the “come hither” from some smoking hot young lady who has just come back from Massachusetts where she worked on the Brown campaign. Do you say in a dignified voice -”Nay Good Lass – My loins ache only for those who approve of a super-tax on existing health insurance benefits with exceptions made for the members of organized labor”? At that point do you ask her to read a DNC pamphlet and tell her to get back to you? It will be interesting to see how this one will work out.

Gee, Mr Butt, my experience proves just the opposite. In fact, after an encounter with a conservative waitress in Nashville, she said it was the best she’d ever had because I was the first guy to take off his underwear.

Are you sure you want to decry this stuff when THIS stuff is going on?

By JULISSA McKINNON
The Press-Enterprise

After a parent complained about an elementary school student stumbling across “oral sex” in a classroom dictionary, Menifee Union School District officials decided to pull Merriam Webster’s 10th edition from all school shelves earlier this week.

School officials will review the dictionary to decide if it should be permanently banned because of the “sexually graphic” entry, said district spokeswoman Betti Cadmus. The dictionaries were initially purchased a few years ago for fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms districtwide, according to a memo to the superintendent.

“It’s just not age appropriate,” said Cadmus, adding that this is the first time a book has been removed from classrooms throughout the district.

“It’s hard to sit and read the dictionary, but we’ll be looking to find other things of a graphic nature,” Cadmus said. She explained that other dictionary entries defining human anatomy would probably not be cause for alarm.

Meanwhile, some parents are questioning the district’s response and some school board members are asking why officials did not consult with them.

“Censorship in the schools, really? Pretty soon the only dictionary in the school library will be the Bert and Ernie dictionary,” said Emanuel Chavez, the parent of second- and sixth-grade students. “If the kids are exposed to it, it’s up to the parents to explain it to them at their level.”

Board member Rita Peters questioned why one parent’s complaint would lead the district to pull the dictionaries.

“If we’re going to pull a book because it has something on oral sex, then every book in the library with that better be pulled,” she said. “The standard needs to be consistent … We don’t need parents setting policy.”

Peters said if the dictionary quarantine is setting a precedent, a committee should be formed to review all school books for age-appropriateness.

Board member Randy Freeman, an elementary school teacher and parent to four daughters in Menifee schools, said he supports the initial decision to ban the dictionary temporarily.

Freeman said it’s “a prestigious dictionary that’s used in the Riverside County spelling bee, but I also imagine there are words in there of concern.”

This is just like the Cloward-Pivon strategy- it’s a very poorly thought out plan because they never bother to think about how it would work (in the case of C-P, what they would make collapse is not capitalism, but rather the very socialist system they were planning to set up).

LOL! Who needs reasonable debate, when you can simply boil politics down to “no support = no sex”!

Is this a joke? It must be!? These young Lefties couldn’t possibly be serious…? Or are they really this dense? What’ll they come up with next? No cap-&-trade, no cunnilingus?

Odd they should say they’ll “never f*** you if you’re against us,” when the legislation they propose will ultimately f*** you, me, and all of America! Guess it’s a case of damned if you do and damned if you don’t, or rather f***ed if you do and… never mind….

This is fabulous! A spectacular example of what is meant by the epithet:”libtard”. Think about it:between abortion on one hand,and politically-motivated celibacy on the other,leftists will drive themselves to extinction.There are other benefits too!Think of the drop in STD rates,and the corresponding drop in the trollish postings by future syphillitics,of the style of DWIGHT,MOHON, BC, and POOR CITIZEN. This is indeed good news!

Who says I would want to have sex (intercourse) with you if you are only interested in taking more of my money to pay for other people, I already pay taxes for other people…apparently you do not nor do you intend to, what happens when your parents cut you off from you allowance?

“she said it was the best she’d ever had because I was the first guy to take off his underwear.”

She says that to all the guys, you were just the first to believe her!
The really sad part is that if you didn’t wear your BVD’s backwards, you wouldn’t need to take them off. The little slit goes in front.
‘Course you probably went to that bar because of all those nice guys will to push in your stool. That would explain why your BVD’s were on backwards.

Fine with me. I don’t want to come anywhere near liberal commi cum dumpsters anyway. Liberal chicks hump anything with a pulse and are riddled with all kinds of STDs. I only date conservative chicks which is working out great for me since they’re a lot more beautiful inside and out.